Kerala: Retd IPS officer B Sandhya on actor Dileep acquitted in 2017 actor assault case

Stating that when she had taken up the case in 2017, it was one of the most sensitive assignments she had taken up and she knew from the start that framing charges under Section 120B (criminal conspiracy) in a case tied to the film industry would be extremely challenging.

"It is the nature of the Section, it is not easy to get conviction," the retired IPS official told ANI.

"This was a high-profile case, we have dealt with so many such cases. It was a great challenge," she said adding that they pursued the case with utmost seriousness. This included interrogation of people close to the accused, seizing footage, checking vehicle records, reviewing statements, and trying to build a chain of custody.

She said that they understood that the sanctity of in-camera proceedings had to be preserved - what transpires inside the courtroom had to stay protected from media spectacle, leaks, and public pressure.

The digital proof the memory card was reportedly accessed several times while in court custody; "its hash value was changed," and that the official said had there was discussions among the members of public.

"It is not only the simple thing of conviction that matters, the cleaning up of Malalayam cinema industry area has happened due to this case and the trial was a great challenge," said the retired IPS official on the case that shook the conscience of cinema-loving Kerala.

No matter how thorough their investigation was, securing a conviction under conspiracy charges is never easy, said Sandhya noting that the burden of proof is high and the prosecution must convince the court beyond a reasonable doubt.

"Any 120 B case would be very challenging and this was a high-profile case, otherwise also we have dealt with such a case. It is a great challenge, it is not easy to get conviction," she said.

The court's acquittal of Dileep does not bring happiness or unhappiness, she said.

"See there is no happiness or sadness, we do our job. I have been part of investiagations for 35 years now," the retired IPS official said.

The case pertains to an actress who worked in Malayalam, Tamil, and Telugu films and was allegedly abducted and molested inside her car by a group of men who had forced their way into the vehicle on the night of February 17, 2017.

The judgement was pronounced by Honey M Varghese, Principal District and Sessions Court judge in Ernakulam city. The court has, however, found that accused from no. 1 to no. 6 guilty and will pronounce punishment for those found guilty on December 12.

The accused in the case were the first accused, NS Sunil, widely known as 'Pulsur Suni', alleged to have orchestrated the abduction and assault of the actress.

The second accused, Martin Antony, third accused B. Manikandan, fourth accused V P Vijeesh, fifth accused H Salim alias Vadiwal Salim, sixth accused Pradeep, seventh accused Charly Thomas, ninth accused Sanilkumar, alias Mesthri Sanil, and the fifteenth accused, G Sarath.

The charges invoked against the accused span a wide range of IPC sections, including criminal conspiracy (120A, 120B), abetment (109), wrongful confinement (342, 357), kidnapping (366), outraging modesty (354), attempt to disrobe (354B), gang rape (376D), criminal intimidation (506(i)), destruction of evidence (201), harbouring an offender (212), and common intention (34).The trial, which began on March 8, 2018, has been lengthy and complex.

A total of 261 witnesses were examined, many in camera, including several prominent film personalities, with 28 witnesses turning hostile. Over the years, two special prosecutors stepped down, and the survivor's request to replace the presiding judge was denied. The prosecution submitted 833 documents and 142 material objects, while the defence produced 221 documents. Witness examination alone spanned 438 days. (ANI)